AUSTIN | Transportation Updates

[atxsnail]

Originally Posted by drummer

I like both options, but my preference would be Option 1 only because I like that there is a more direct connection to the transit center. However, I certainly see Novacek's point on the connectivity to development south of 183 with Option 2.

If there would be any combination or staggered plan in mind, I would support Option 2 followed by a version of Option 1 where the bridge goes directly from the transit center to the rail station. If I were to cut costs, I wouldn't have it go to the east side of Lamar only because the Option 2 crossings would already serve that side. If the transit center sees higher numbers from more buses, having a direct connection could help to get everyone across without worrying about vehicular traffic.

I prefer Option 1 if the goal is to continue to make NLTC an important facility. The more direct the transfer, the better. Option 2 while technically not that different and a whole bunch cheaper, feels pretty hostile to the end user unless you relocate the bus stops. Honestly I wish they could just phase it out and redevelop it. You could even keep a park and ride if you made structured parking keep some spots for transit users.

Of the existing bus lines there, the 350 and 383 could easily be redesigned to use Crestview instead. The 350 was already there but moved back for various fixable reasons. I think at least part of the problem with the 350 was noise complaints about the large number of buses queueing near the apartments with engines running but the electric buses fix that concern. Presumably we'll still have local service for people transfering from north of 183 to get people there.

The other problem, bus bunching at west side of the St John's and Lamar intersection could be alleviated through signal pre-emption and the grade separation of the Red Line.

There's still the problem of the 323 (Anderson) route connectivity, but I suspect most riders would love to not have to sit through that really long, multi-traffic signal loop around NLTC every day.

[Echostatic]

This program is pretty interesting and hopefully can expand easily.

https://communityimpact.com/austin/centr...pedestrian-connected-vehicle-technology/

[KevinFromTexas]

The Austin Rowing Club is moving out of their home which will be affected by the new bridge across the river near the Waterfront District.

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/4...-of-new-home-amid-project-connect-plans/

[papertowelroll]

Originally Posted by Geckos_Rule

Though speaking of Subway, it looks like the proposed Waller creek bridge that is part of this project will come out right around where the "Rainey St./MACC" station is planned to be.

I'm still frustrated that the station isn't actually near Rainey/the MACC, and it's more like "Second CC station," (since placement is far closer to the CC than it is to 1/2 of the condos on the south side of Rainey) but either way that long with this development and others will completely transform Rainey St.

My understanding is that there will only be one "CC station" that the blue line stops at, which serves both the CC and Rainey. The other "CC station" (aka Brush Square) is the existing red line station which is on the surface. The blue line subway station will have at least three different exits: one to Brush Square, one to Caesar Chavez, and one to Trinity where the rowing club currently is.

Hopefully we can have some moving sidewalks or something so that it's not too much of a hike to get to any of these exits. From the diagram I've seen the Subway platform is somewhere halfway between each exit, and in fact the Trinity exit appears to be the closest.

I think the walk from the Trinity exit over this new bridge to the Rainey area shouldn't be too bad really. Not much different from say Republic Square to the Seaholm area, for example. It will be a hell of an improvement over what we have now, that's for sure.

[sjk]

Biden signs infrastructure bill marking victory in hard-fought legislative battle

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-h...-hard-fought-legislative-battle-n1283910

[chinchaaa]

Originally Posted by papertowelroll

I think the walk from the Trinity exit over this new bridge to the Rainey area shouldn't be too bad really. Not much different from say Republic Square to the Seaholm area, for example. It will be a hell of an improvement over what we have now, that's for sure.

Five minutes or less from the station to Rainey Street. I think this is great, and even in New York, Tokyo, London, etc., it's rare to get door to door service with public transit. I think a 5 minute walk is a very short walk, and is much better than anything I expected. Anyone who thinks this isn't great needs a reality check.

[drummer]

Originally Posted by chinchaaa

Five minutes or less from the station to Rainey Street. I think this is great, and even in New York, Tokyo, London, etc., it's rare to get door to door service with public transit. I think a 5 minute walk is a very short walk, and is much better than anything I expected. Anyone who thinks this isn't great needs a reality check.

Agreed. Folks here who want to vote stuff down because it "doesn't go where they go" drive me nuts.

[Geckos_Rule]

Originally Posted by chinchaaa

Five minutes or less from the station to Rainey Street. I think this is great, and even in New York, Tokyo, London, etc., it's rare to get door to door service with public transit. I think a 5 minute walk is a very short walk, and is much better than anything I expected. Anyone who thinks this isn't great needs a reality check.

Well yeah, I agree. But in those cities, there is already a huge network of transit as well as a serious lack of space to put most things. Even in NYC for example, they are limited in where they can put subway stations just based on where other subway lines and stations already exist.

Here, it's certainly close enough. And hopefully once 92/98 Red River gets built, as well as the Travis, and whatever is planned for the parking lot adjacent to 92/98 red river, then Red River street will be much nicer (in terms of pavement, sidewalks, etc.), and it will be a simple walk.

But ideally, I'd just rather have had it on the "other side" of Rainey, where there is certainly still the space, and I think it would serve a larger resident population. As it stands now, if I get onto the train at the Brush Sq. stop, I'll basically be taking it one more stop to the other side of the CC, then have to take it further to actually get anywhere. Again, it's definitely still fairly close to Rainey St., but it certainly seems like they are catering more towards the CC (and I suppose the Four Seasons/Marriot/Fairmont) than they are to Rainey St., while still naming it the Rainey St. stop.

[papertowelroll]

Originally Posted by Geckos_Rule

But ideally, I'd just rather have had it on the "other side" of Rainey, where there is certainly still the space, and I think it would serve a larger resident population. As it stands now, if I get onto the train at the Brush Sq. stop, I'll basically be taking it one more stop to the other side of the CC, then have to take it further to actually get anywhere. Again, it's definitely still fairly close to Rainey St., but it certainly seems like they are catering more towards the CC (and I suppose the Four Seasons/Marriot/Fairmont) than they are to Rainey St., while still naming it the Rainey St. stop.

Did you read my post above or look at the map I posted? What you are describing is not how it will work. There is no blue line stop at Brush Square, Brush Square is a station for the already existing red line, which is a diesel train on the surface, not a light rail train underground.

There is one single subway platform which is located underneath Trinity street. It can be accessed by multiple subway entrances: one near Brush Square, one near the rowing club and this new bridge that will be built, another on Caesar Chavez.

As far as why they didn't locate the station closer to Rainey, I imagine that there are a few issues. #1, they need a bridge across the river. Trinity apparently works for that, Rainey may not. #2, they need a stop by the convention center, and a connection for the red line. If they made a separate station at Rainey, they'd now need to make two complete subway stations rather than one. (which is apparently what you think they are already doing?) This would obviously cost a lot of money, and that money would be better spent on another aspect of this system.

[drummer]

Are they doing any sort of underground retail at the stops? Even a basic coffee/beverage stand would be nice.

[sjk]

Originally Posted by drummer

Are they doing any sort of underground retail at the stops? Even a basic coffee/beverage stand would be nice.

https://www.capmetro.org/project-connect/system-plan/downtown-austin-transit-tunnel


The tunnel's stations will provide connections to the new rail system and expanded bus service. In addition to a transitway, the stations will provide a new public space for transit customers and the larger community.

The stations will be climate-controlled and are planned to include features such as public art installations, a performance venue for live music, shops, coffee shops, restaurants, free Wi-Fi access, comfortable seating, public restrooms and security cameras. Agents at the CapMetro Transit Store will serve customers with transit information and sell tickets for all services.

[clubtokyo]

That’s awesome!

[Speculator]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

The Austin Rowing Club is moving out of their home which will be affected by the new bridge across the river near the Waterfront District.

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/4...-of-new-home-amid-project-connect-plans/

Goodbye Alta.

[The ATX]

Does anyone know what Cap Metro is getting from the Feds now that the infrastructure bill was signed? NYC got $25 Billion when including pandemic relief funds.

[freerover]

Originally Posted by The ATX

Does anyone know what Cap Metro is getting from the Feds now that the infrastructure bill was signed? NYC got $25 Billion when including pandemic relief funds.

It's only 3.3 billion for the entire state. It doesn't seem like it will be a significant increase to the already expected funds but it's early days.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by freerover

It's only 3.3 billion for the entire state. It doesn't seem like it will be a significant increase to the already expected funds but it's early days.

CapMetro will not get a promise of Federal funding for the light rail lines until the FTA issues a Record of Decision, which does not occur until the FEIS is released and approved for each individual line. It is possible the Orange Line will get Federal "New Starts" funding while the Blue Line does not, or vice versa. Both or neither, or both, none, or one will qualify for guaranteed infrastructure loans instead. It is very early in the process to know what will eventually happen.

Hopefully there will be enough money for every rail transit project across America, but with everyone springing up with their own proposals elsewhere, 10 to 1 odds that there will never be enough Federal money for everything being proposed. Do not start counting chickens until the eggs are hatched.

[atxsnail]

DOT announced a few RAISE* grant winners recently. El Paso got 900k for a highway deck plaza study over I-10. Dallas got 21m for various projects including urban trails (The Loop), pedestrian infrastructure, intersection improvements, and other stuff.

Does anyone know if Austin got anything or even applied for this round?


*RAISE stands for Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity

[Novacek]

Up on the agenda for Monday's CapMetro meeting is

Approval of a resolution authorizing the President & CEO, or his
designee, to finalize and execute an Advance Funding Agreement with the
Texas Department of Transportation for up to $4,697,745 in Federal financial
assistance for preliminary engineering, final design, and environmental
clearance of the Capital Metro North Lamar Boulevard / Airport Boulevard
MetroRail Grade Separation project.


should have happened years ago, before the funding was stolen for I35.

Hopefully they can finish up that design and be eligible for construction funding while there's still sources of it available.

https://www.capmetro.org/docs/default-so...ard-meeting_agenda.pdf?sfvrsn=ec14af22_2

[JAM]

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas

The Austin Rowing Club is moving out of their home which will be affected by the new bridge across the river near the Waterfront District.

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/4...-of-new-home-amid-project-connect-plans/

Why is there a need for 2 stations less than 1/2 mile apart? Why not keep ARC and go underground to other side of LBL? Eliminate the cost of a station, the cost of building another ARC and keep the lake front beautiful and accessible to the public. Train stations are fugly. So are train bridges.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by JAM

Why is there a need for 2 stations less than 1/2 mile apart? Why not keep ARC and go underground to other side of LBL? Eliminate the cost of a station, the cost of building another ARC and keep the lake front beautiful and accessible to the public. Train stations are fugly. So are train bridges.

1. Because it's _downtown_. A higher density of stations is both expected and desirable.

2. Adding even more unground distance will add hundreds of millions of dollars (at least) to costs. Dwarfing the cost of the ARC building.

3. Doing so would eliminate the incredibly needed bike/pedestrian connection. So much for making it "accessible to the public".

So you'd be spending millions (at least) to make it less useful all to save _half_ of a building that will be 15 years old at that time.